Microsoft Introduces .NET Core

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Introduces .NET Core

Posted by Soulskill on Friday December 5, 2014 @07:58AM from the how-the-sausage-is-made dept.

New submitter I will be back writes: Microsoft's Immo Landwerth has provided more details on the open source .NET Core. Taking a page from the Mono cookbook, .NET Core was built to be modular with unified Base Class Library (BCL), so you can install only the necessary packages for Core and ship it with applications using NuGet. Thus, NuGet becomes a first-class citizen and the default tool to deliver .NET Core packages.

As a smaller and cross-platform subset of the .NET Framework, it will have its own update schedule, updating multiple times a year, while .NET will be updated once a year. At the release of .NET 4.6, Core will be a clear subset of the .NET Framework. With future iterations it will be ahead of the .NET Framework. "The .NET Core platform is a new .NET stack that is optimized for open source development and agile delivery on NuGet. We're working with the Mono community to make it great on Windows, Linux and Mac, and Microsoft will support it on all three platforms."

187 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:02 · Score: 1, Insightful

Why would I write to that, when anything it can do, can also be done by non-Microsoft controlled APIs, that are portable to more than just the three platforms they list?
Once burned, twice shy. Sorry MS, your time is past.
1. Re:why would I write to that? by CastrTroy · 2014-12-05 08:20 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  I write web applications in .Net, and as far as I'm concerned, nothing else I've see comes close for large projects. There was a bunch of hype about Ruby, so I tried that. For anything beyond basic CRUD applications, it was quite painful to use. The .Net API has amazing amounts of built in functionality. I can't think of any language that comes close. It amazes me how people write stuff in Java without having a decent "Date" data type. Why should I have to use a third party library to get decent date support?
  
  --
  
  Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
2. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:23 · Score: 0
  
  If you're a fanboi, maybe. I, on the other hand, have no grounds to assert its fabulatory goodness and so it's easy to deny.
3. Re:why would I write to that? by MightyMartian · 2014-12-05 08:26 · Score: 2
  
  Whatever the merits of the .NET API, the fact is that if you want maximum number of platforms, even after this project reaches fruition, supported platforms will still be a fraction of Java's.
  Java has no lack of flaws, but it's out there and has been for fifteen years now, and is the bedrock of some very large open source and proprietary solutions.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
4. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:30 · Score: 1
  
  You are right, but in any case .net coming out to other platforms is a win-win. On the api itself, I prefer .netÃs over java, both on functinonality and simplicity for almost every task. Same can be said for the IDEs available
5. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:31 · Score: 0
  
  It can't really be considered a viable choice because it is controlled completely by MS just as no other software platform/stack/api should be taken seriously if it is controlled by a single entity.
6. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:32 · Score: 0
  
  As for server side richest eco system, Java is unrivaled (transaction mgmt, persistence, dist. cache and so on : .net is quite lagging behind). As for front side, .net (or java) are irrelevant : javascript and HTML 5 framework are king here.
  Languages are not as important as their eco system.
7. Re:why would I write to that? by Gadget_Guy · 2014-12-05 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  Why would I write to that, when anything it can do, can also be done by non-Microsoft controlled APIs, that are portable to more than just the three platforms they list?
  Mono is available on more platforms that those listed, so they will presumably do the same for .NET Core. From Wikipedia:
  Mono can be run on many software systems including Android, most Linux distributions, BSD, OS X, Windows, Solaris, and even some game consoles such as PlayStation 3, Wii, and Xbox 360.
  It also later list iOS as a targeted platform (I don't know why the summary didn't mention it).
8. Re:why would I write to that? by lgw · 2014-12-05 08:36 · Score: 1, Troll
  
  Why should I have to use a third party library to get decent date support?
  Hey now, a Java Calendar object is roughly half a kilobyte (really), surely there must be some useful functionality in there somewhere! Right? Well, I can't parse a string into a date using Calendar, I can't add any sort of "duration" object to a Calendar, though I can do "add(Calendar.DAY_OF_MONTH, -5)", so there's that.
  Java doesn't support List, doesn't have a in-built String.IsNullOrEmpty, doesn't have C#'s wonderful "??" operator for null-fixing, doesn't have proper properties (is that redundant?) but here I am stuck using it.
  C# is about 8 years ahead of Java at this point.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
9. Re:why would I write to that? by FatdogHaiku · 2014-12-05 08:38 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Once burned, twice shy. Sorry MS, your time is past.
  But, they now embrace open source!
  Let us all extend them common courtesy...
  We don't want to extinguish the good will they are now showing...
  
  --
  You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
10. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:42 · Score: 0
  
  This is why we switched to Scala. We get to re-use our knowledge and infrastructure on J2EE containers, but with the awesome language improvements.
11. Re:why would I write to that? by lgw · 2014-12-05 08:45 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I'd say the only platforms that really matter when languages like Java or C# are on the table are "Linux servers", "Windows servers", "Android phones", and "iPhones" (and tablets similar to the phones). If C# becomes easy to run on those platforms (which is clearly MS's plan, but we'll see) there's just no reason not to use it.
  C# development is worlds easier than Java. If I can write for Linux servers with it easily, it will be my first choice for professional development. If I can easily write C# code that runs both on MS desktops and Android mobile, it will be my first choice for personal development. I wish MS the best of luck here, but they really need to hit this one out of the park - a half-assed effort isn't going to cut it.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
12. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:45 · Score: 0
  
  The only reason any user ever intentionally installed .NET was to run Silverlight.
  The only reason any user ever intentionally installed Silverlight was to play Netflix.
  Netflix no longer needs Silverlight. Therefore, no user anywhere has a reason to install the .NET runtime.
13. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:45 · Score: 0, Redundant
  
  .NET for webapps is just a Joke. Look at the following benchmarks:
  Java. Much more widely available, much larger ecosystem, deployed where it matters,...
  Just some numbers from a Dell R720xd dual-Xeon E5 v2 + 10 GbE: http://www.techempower.com/ben... [techempower.com]
  
  Throughput:
  Java: 831,515 responses per second vs .NET: 108,543 (and that is with a pure .NET http listener, you don't even want to know the numbers using normal .NET mechanisms)
  
  Or Latency:
  Java 0.4ms vs .NET http listener: 10.1ms
  
  See, these are worlds apart. There is no large scale .NET app I know of (seeing these numbers you would be nuts to try it). Except "London Stock Exchange", which was a monumental fail even MS invested Millions in that poster child project. Result: CEO fired and now on Linux in C++. Google it, very funny story.
  
  And I was very fair to .NET, I took the fastest .NET variant but the standard Java ones. There are better Java ones. And I took the Json benchmark. E.g. in Cleartext benchmark it would be Java undertow 4.16M resp/sec vs .NET 110k resp/sec, that is 40 times less for .NET. Of course the winner of the benchmarks is C++ (e.g. 6.7M resp/sec for Cleartext benchmark).
14. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:52 · Score: 0
  
  Sounds somewhat narrow. What about all those embedded devices that have just enough horsepower to run a java stack? The hardware world makes use of software as well, and it doesn't always use C/C++, or Python...
15. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:53 · Score: 0
  
  sorry, correct link: http://www.techempower.com/ben...
16. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:55 · Score: 0
  
  You mean like Java which is controlled completely by Oracle the king of lock in?
17. Re:why would I write to that? by AaronLS · 2014-12-05 08:57 · Score: 0
  
  .NET has those mature components available either within the framework or as open source libraries. It has a very healthy ecosystem with lots of freedom.
18. Re:why would I write to that? by AaronLS · 2014-12-05 08:58 · Score: 0
  
  I can name alot of things you just used just to make that one post that are completely out of your control. Oh you think slashdot is freedom? Tired of seeing Bennet Hasslehoof make the front page? Too bad, not your choice no matter how much the community complains.
19. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:58 · Score: 0
  
  The target is general applications, not embedded systems. Though I would argue that they shouldn't be using Java either.
20. Re:why would I write to that? by AaronLS · 2014-12-05 09:00 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "There is no large scale .NET app I know of"
  Ever heard of stackexchange?
21. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 09:01 · Score: 1
  
  Java 8 solves most of the problems you mentioned. C# is a kitchen sink language, so don't expect Java to pick up all of the bells and whistles (nor do I think it should).
22. Re:why would I write to that? by gameboyhippo · 2014-12-05 09:03 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  It amazes me how people write stuff in Java without having a decent "Date" data type. Why should I have to use a third party library to get decent date support?
  Java 8 introduced a new date time API. Admittedly I haven't used it as all of my code uses the old API. As far as the old API, one would use a Calendar when they are working with social dates and times and use a Date when working with an exact point in time. It isn't difficult.
23. Re:why would I write to that? by lgw · 2014-12-05 09:05 · Score: 1
  
  Gah, Slashcode accidentally half my post at least I should fix:
  *Java doesn't support List<int>
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
24. Re:why would I write to that? by PhrostyMcByte · 2014-12-05 09:06 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Why should I have to use a third party library to get decent date support?
  I've questioned that myself while working in .NET. Ever needed to write time zone aware code?
  Date libraries, as it turns out, are rather monstrously difficult to make. While .NET did a great job for the common stuff, uncommon things can be painful, error prone, or impossible.
  The fullest solution I've found so far is Noda Time, which is actually based on the Joda-Time Java library. It feels out of place with a number of Javaisms still in it, but it provides a much richer functionality and better separation of concerns.
25. Re:why would I write to that? by ichthus · 2014-12-05 09:08 · Score: 1
  
  Hey, don't hassle the Hoof. Besides, isn't slashcode freely available?
  
  Admittedly, I don't know who Bennet Hasselhoof is. I guess I haven't been paying attention. ?
  
  --
  sig: sauer
26. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 09:17 · Score: 0
  
  Duh, Capt. Obvious. What part of "just as no other software platform/stack/api should be taken seriously if it is controlled by a single entity" didn't you understand?
27. Re:why would I write to that? by bondsbw · 2014-12-05 09:18 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  A point of open source is to remove the ability to "extinguish". Microsoft doesn't want it any more? Who cares what they think, the community will decide if it lives or dies.
  
  --
  All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
28. Re:why would I write to that? by jader3rd · 2014-12-05 09:29 · Score: 1
  
  There is no large scale .NET app I know of
  
  Microsoft Exchange is written in C#.
29. Re:why would I write to that? by AaronLS · 2014-12-05 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  .NET source is freely available. If that's the standard we are measuring by.
  Here's the entire web stack for example:
  https://github.com/ASP-NET-MVC...
  Compiler is open source to, and they are putting the BCL into an open source license as well (source code has been available, but under a non-open license previously for few years).
  Bennet is this guy who writes lengthy rambling opinion pieces that slashdot repeatedly posts every week or so and despite a large outcry of how ridiculous that it is that he gets to use slashdot as his personal blog, they keep posting his crap again and again. So regardless of whether slashdot is open source, the parent poster used this particular implementation which is a system completely out of his control and acts of its own free will regardless of the will of its user base. If his considers this the measure by which "It can't really be considered a viable choice" then he is a hypocrate. He can always take the source and pay for his own dedicated server and invest the time to setup and implement his own slashdot, but it stands for now that he is using the implementation out of his control.
  He is conveniently drawing a very curved line in the sand to place .NET into a realm he disapproves of while not measuring everything else he uses by the same standard.
30. Re:why would I write to that? by phantomfive · 2014-12-05 09:36 · Score: 2
  
  Java to pick up all of the bells and whistles (nor do I think it should).
  Absolutely not. Java has a niche among semi-competent developers, preventing them from making a huge mess of things, and it serves that niche well. Adding bells and whistles ruins that niche.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
31. Re:why would I write to that? by Kielistic · 2014-12-05 09:38 · Score: 1
  
  Personally I'm a little confused about the assertion that seems to be completely contradicted by reality.
32. Re:why would I write to that? by Kielistic · 2014-12-05 09:42 · Score: 2
  
  Contrasted with Java which is a kitchen sink language also but has a whole in it to helpfully keep it from filling up with usefulness.
33. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 09:43 · Score: 1
  
  .NET Core runs on 12MB one of the targets are the embedded devices. And remember .NET Native is in the road so no need of JIT at all in the embedded devices.
34. Re:why would I write to that? by OrangeTide · 2014-12-05 09:47 · Score: 1
  
  Aye! This scotsman agrees.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
35. Re:why would I write to that? by Orne · 2014-12-05 09:56 · Score: 1
  
  TimeZoneInfo.ConvertTimeToUtc( local ) and ConvertTimeFromUtc( utcDate, TimeZoneInfo.Local ) seem to do the trick, introduced in the framework in .Net 3.5. And you can use a stock name from GetSystemTimeZones to convert to any standard time zone, or roll your own with CreateCustomTimeZone
  And more importantly they are all backward compatible for dates before 2007 when the US congress mucked with the daylight saving rules.
36. Re:why would I write to that? by HiThere · 2014-12-05 10:06 · Score: 2
  
  What's the license?
  Sorry, eventually I may consider .NET, now that it's officially been opened, but I'll need to see how the community development goes. If nobody but MS can touch it, I won't trust it.
  FWIW, even though Java is mainly FOSS licensed, I don't trust it, and that's BECAUSE Oracle is such a bastard. Suing over API interface identity? Sorry, but how can I trust you? I know they lost the suit (at one level...did they appeal?), but that they would even consider it makes me dubious about them. OTOH, the GPL is pretty strong, so I still feel reasonably comfortable with the parts of Java that are covered by the GPL. But if I were to publish I'd generate the documentation with Doxygen rather than javadoc.
  As for .NET ... I'll wait and see how it develops. In some ways C# looks interresting, but nothing dramatic, and I don't develop for the web, so... What's in it for me?
  
  --
  
  I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
37. Re:why would I write to that? by phantomfive · 2014-12-05 10:09 · Score: 0
  
  The .Net API has amazing amounts of built in functionality. I can't think of any language that comes close. It amazes me how people write stuff in Java without having a decent "Date" data type
  Well, you basically lost your credibility there.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
38. Re:why would I write to that? by PhrostyMcByte · 2014-12-05 10:12 · Score: 1
  
  Merely needing to convert time zones is a trivial requirement. Work with them any other way and it's a nightmare. My first exposure to it was when implementing a crontab-like scheduling software, which on proper implementations has defined behavior to not fall on its face when daylight savings time wreaks havoc on the world. I couldn't find a way to do this reliably in .NET, but Noda made it possible.
  Don't take my word on why Noda should be used though... read from it's blog for plenty of examples for why the seemingly great .NET DateTime can be a minefield in far more common situations than mine.
39. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 10:15 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  .NET ecosystem is very small if compared to Java. And many projects are just ports of Java stuff, payed by MS because otherwise the ecosystem would be even smaller. And look at performance, .NET is a joke for anything serious: http://www.techempower.com/ben...
40. Re:why would I write to that? by ArcadeMan · 2014-12-05 10:23 · Score: 1
  
  I can name alot too.
  
  --
  Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
41. Re:why would I write to that? by Livius · 2014-12-05 10:25 · Score: 0
  
  Ever heard of stackexchange?
  No.
42. Re:why would I write to that? by ADRA · 2014-12-05 10:55 · Score: 1
  
  I'd complain more about Java generics being an illusion to begin with, which is annoying but not the end of the Earth. Considering that all generics were overlayed the java 'Object' typing model of which runtime/language primitives like int/float/etc.. are not a part of, it isn't surprising that primitives were left out of the generics system as well.
  isNullOrEmpty is a trivial single-line method, which is generally why nobody who develops in java cares about this or any other nit picking problems. Why not bitch about the lack of Pairs and Triples?
  "??" is once again syntactic sugar, which is fine if you want to obfuscate and reduce code clearity, but if I wanted to write (X==null?X:-1). I think most people can deal with it as well.
  There are many reasons to hate on Java, but at least rant about things (like non-runtime generics) that are actual problems to people who use the language on a day to day basis?
  
  --
  Bye!
43. Re: why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 11:43 · Score: 0
  
  Java 8 has a nice new Date class, so maybe you should give it a try again. That said, I've been a big fan of C#/.Net since .Net 2.0. Nice language, decently thought out class libraries. It's biggest flaw to me has always been it's single platform ties. I'm hoping that this move by Microsoft will lead to me doing more .Net work in the future. I think it could be good for .Net as well, bringing an influx of new ideas and maybe some porting of open source tools.
44. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 11:45 · Score: 0
  
  No, true Scotsman here. I linked to proof that you can normally serve 10 times more clients on a similar Java implementation on very powerful servers. Here the link again: http://www.techempower.com/ben...
45. Re:why would I write to that? by iONiUM · 2014-12-05 11:51 · Score: 1
  
  This is an enterprise level, SaaS-ready BI stack that includes in-memory analytics and able to connect to over 20 data providers (OLAP, SQL, Excel, Access, SAP, GA, etc.) written in ASP.NET with a HTML5 + JS front end: Dundas BI.
  You don't know what you're talking about.
46. Re:why would I write to that? by Wootery · 2014-12-05 12:07 · Score: 1
  
  I think AC is trying to say they dislike both Java and .Net because of lock-in.
  But if everything's Open Source, you're just as free to fork Java or .Net as, say, Ruby on Rails. (Well, assuming you don't infringe trademarks... and ignoring copyright/patent lawsuits...)
47. Re:why would I write to that? by Wootery · 2014-12-05 12:10 · Score: 1
  
  I feel you're ignoring Mono, which exists and generally works. Microsoft doesn't have total control of all implementations.
48. Re:why would I write to that? by beakerMeep · 2014-12-05 12:20 · Score: 1
  
  I think you misunderstand how embrace, extend, extinguish works.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...
  Extend provides them with the platform lock-in, extinguish is only when extend has provided them enough market share that by being a de facto standard, they can steer the tech as they wish. They can let it languish. Or provide cosmetic updates, or add more platform lock-in.
  Note that this framework is called "core" -- a perfectly normal name in most situations, but interesting when looked at from the perspective of embrace, extend, extinguish.
  I guess the OSS lesson should be "be wary of your 'extended' dependencies". MS could be doing right here but I am a skeptic.
  
  --
  meep
49. Re:why would I write to that? by lgw · 2014-12-05 13:03 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Useful syntax sugar is the only difference between any two Turing-complete languages.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
50. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 14:06 · Score: 0
  
  You can find a lot of wild benchmarks on the internet. Did you know nodeJS can scale better than Java? About a third of the response time and double the number of requests.
51. Re:why would I write to that? by ChunderDownunder · 2014-12-05 14:24 · Score: 1
  
  List<Integer> and autoboxing?
52. Re:why would I write to that? by ATMAvatar · 2014-12-05 15:07 · Score: 1
  
  What's the license?
  As stated on the Microsoft GitHub page, they use MIT or Apache 2 licenses for most of their projects.
  
  --
  "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
53. Re:why would I write to that? by lgw · 2014-12-05 15:57 · Score: 1
  
  And now you can have nulls anywhere in your list, so you really should check for those. Even more fun with Maps, where null means "either we didn't find it, or it was null, guess which!".
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
54. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 15:59 · Score: 0
  
  " I couldn't find a way to do this reliably in .NET,"
  What is the definition of "reliably" when you talk about handling dates? It either works or it doesn't. Date manipulation in .NET is really not that hard. Instead of introducing another external non-.NET solution into your .NET application I would look a little harder at the provided .NET Date functionality.
55. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 16:19 · Score: 0
  
  Its really easy to make your own data types. You should try it someday.
56. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 16:22 · Score: 1
  
  A List of 1M ints would take 4MB, all in contiguous pages of RAM. A List of 1M Integers will take 4MB just for all the references (or 8MB on a 64-bit JVM without compressed references), plus probably 16MB scattered unpredictably about. But that's just the overhead of RAM (plus paging, cache misses, etc.). Then there's the overhead of boxing and unboxing.
  But the other problem is that it's not type-safe. You can cast it to a List of Objects and put any old objects you want in it, so every access to the List has to include a check to verify that you're really accessing an Integer and not something else.
  And since an Integer is immutable, any change to any element in the list will leave the previous element as garbage and incur the overhead of creating a new object.
  So even though there isn't much syntactic difference between the two types of Lists, the Java version has significantly more overhead.
  dom
57. Re:why would I write to that? by KingMotley · 2014-12-05 17:11 · Score: 1
  
  If C# becomes easy to run on those platforms
  You could run it on those platforms for years through mono and Xamarin.
58. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 18:50 · Score: 1
  
  What's in it for you is C# is a very good language. And .net is a fairly well designed framework/libraries for getting stuff done.
  I've said this before Microsoft has never ever acted in a predatory manner towards people using their tools. What I mean by that is they want some nominal amount of money, but they don't want to drink your milkshake. Example game companies have used VC++ and other tools to develop games that have sold hundreds of thousands of copies running on windows and does Microsoft ever demand a cut? No.
  It's all nice to bitch about Microsoft but a lot of their competitors are far worse, Apple, Google, Oracle. Ever try and develop a console game? Had your app not approved by Apple, of pulled by Google. Found yourself paying license fees through the nose for Enterprise software with no good options to escape, ALA Oracle. Or try and deal with network products ala Cisco?
  Yeah.
59. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 19:42 · Score: 0
  
  For he's a jolly good fellow, for he's a jolly good fellow
  For he's a jolly good fellow (pause), which nobody can deny!
  Seriously, .NET was very good a decade ago. But it's aging and heading towards obsolescence.
60. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 20:00 · Score: 0
  
  The embedded world is getting squished because of cheap hardware. Your system price point where embedded linux is valid is around $30 / current draw > 50mA and those numbers are dropping fast. If your system cost is $100 you can well afford to slap in ,net.
  Note that, if you want to do embedded Java, Oracle wants a cut.
61. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 20:18 · Score: 0
  
  The class you are looking for is DateTimeOffset...
62. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 00:13 · Score: 0
  
  Copyright (c) Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc. All rights reserved.
  Microsoft Open Technologies would like to thank its contributors, a list
  of whom are at http://aspnetwebstack.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=Contributors.
  Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you
  may not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may
  obtain a copy of the License at
  http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
  Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
  distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
  WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
  implied. See the License for the specific language governing permissions
  and limitations under the License.
  It's right fucking there, dude.
63. Re:why would I write to that? by NormalVisual · 2014-12-06 00:19 · Score: 1
  
  Date libraries, as it turns out, are rather monstrously difficult to make.
  
  They're not too bad if you have only the U.S. to deal with, but throw awareness of time zones worldwide into the code and it becomes a mess quickly because of all of the 30 minute, 45 minute, etc. changes. I had to write a separate date library for an airline reservations system many years ago simply because the stock C++ libraries wouldn't deal properly with Australian time zones. Maybe that's changed since then.
  
  --
  Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
64. Re:why would I write to that? by Westley · 2014-12-06 00:33 · Score: 2
  
  Glad you've liked Noda Time - but if you could drop a line to the mailing list or raise an issue for any "Java-isms" you've found, I'd be grateful. I've tried to make it as idiomatic to .NET as I can, other than where doing so would be harmful.
65. Re:why would I write to that? by Westley · 2014-12-06 00:37 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  "It either works or it doesn't" - or it works for all but one or two hours of the year, around a time zone transition. Or it works so long as you're in a time zone which doesn't skip 00:00 when it transitions forward by an hour. Or it works so long as you're not in time zone which skipped a whole day once. How sure are you that all your code works in all of those conditions? How *clear* is your code in terms of which values are meant to be local, which are meant to be in UTC, and which are meant to be local in some other time zone?
  You say that date manipulation in .NET is really not hard - but I've seen an *awful* lot of subtly-broken code using DateTime, and even correct code isn't always *obviously* correct, mainly because `DateTime` doesn't represent one single concept.
  I looked at the .NET DateTime functionality *very* hard before deciding to write Noda TIme - and now, 5 years later, I'm still convinced that it was the right thing to do.
66. Re:why would I write to that? by Westley · 2014-12-06 00:38 · Score: 1
  
  Well, DateTimeOffset isn't a class to start with - it's a struct. But it's still not the panacea some people seem to think it is. There are plenty of situations where what you want *isn't* a DateTImeOffset. Its inclusion was definitely an *improvement* on the state of the date/time API in .NET (as was TimeZoneInfo, for sure) - but that doesn't mean it brings it up to a decent state, IMO.
67. Re:why would I write to that? by serviscope_minor · 2014-12-06 03:40 · Score: 1
  
  Indeed. The annals of The Daily WTF are littered with tales of those who decided to hand-roll their own date class.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
68. Re:why would I write to that? by Lord_Naikon · 2014-12-06 04:17 · Score: 1
  
  FYI Java 8 includes a new date library, so that problem is fixed.
69. Re:why would I write to that? by gigaherz · 2014-12-06 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  At which point I think I trust Microsoft not to sue me more than Oracle.
70. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 07:43 · Score: 0
  
  In that case you should be using Assembly language or C.
71. Re:why would I write to that? by Bengie · 2014-12-06 08:17 · Score: 1
  
  Looks like that site is a joke. Nearly every benchmark out there is wrong. Bad implementation, configuration, or code. .Net ASP is quite fast, but I would rather use something like nginx+node.js
72. Re:why would I write to that? by HiThere · 2014-12-06 09:17 · Score: 1
  
  To what does that license refer?
  Sorry, but when I checked the article I didn't see anything about the release of .NET core under any particular license. There was a link to GitHub where they had released some libraries, to which I presume your response applies, though I'm not sure. (Yes, I could have checked that, but I didn't, and don't intend to unless it becomes important. It's basically irrelevant unless I adopt the approach, and if I do I'll probably get the code from a standard system repository. I'm not a lawyer, and don't like playing lawyer games. The article didn't say what the license was, so I presume that there's something unexpected going on, even if I don't know what.)
  
  --
  
  I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
73. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 12:56 · Score: 0
  
  I'm a Mac/Linux person. I see the value in terms of cross-compiling/linking certain Windows libraries that aren't available on these platform. For new code development? Probably negative. We use a model core of C++ when things get that complicated and then use "native" for the UI view. I don't see using this but some people who are more Windows centric might.
74. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 16:18 · Score: 0
  
  Ever heard of newegg.com :D or your bank whatever it is.
75. Re:why would I write to that? by shutdown+-p+now · 2014-12-06 16:38 · Score: 1
  
  Whatever the merits of the .NET API, the fact is that if you want maximum number of platforms, even after this project reaches fruition, supported platforms will still be a fraction of Java's.
  And yet there's one platform that is notably missing from the list of ones supported by Java: iOS. And that one is kinda a biggie lately.
76. Re:why would I write to that? by shutdown+-p+now · 2014-12-06 16:39 · Score: 1
  
  So given that there's specifically no OS lock-in here (runs everywhere), and it's impossible to lock into .NET itself once it's open source (anyone can just fork it and go their own way), how exactly do you expect EEE to work?
77. Re:why would I write to that? by beakerMeep · 2014-12-06 20:55 · Score: 2
  
  You're talking about the embrace step. Certainly there should not be any OS lock-in there. That would be by design (assuming the worst of EEE for argument's sake). Platform lock-in comes with platform specific extensions, features, APIs, and libraries beyond the core. A very nefarious thing to do would be to introduce subtle bugs in other platform versions of the core or extensions. But that would be ridiculously hard to prove and I use it mostly just to dramatize how EEE could work.
  I'm not saying MS is doing this, I am saying they should be watched with a very skeptical eye. Again... "be wary of your 'extended' dependencies".
  
  --
  meep
78. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 21:41 · Score: 0
  
  Microsoft has not open sourced .NET. They have open sourced a subset which is not quite enough to do anything meaningful. To write an actual application, you have to use libraries that are not part of .NET Core. That's pretty much a textbook example of the "extend" step of embrace, extend, extinguish. There's a reason why people are being skeptical in this thread.
79. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-07 04:01 · Score: 0
  
  Turing-completeness is a property that doesn't apply to computer languages, but to the underlying machine (processor or virtual machine).
  Of course most languages can't compile for a non-Turing-complete machine, so in that sense you might argue they're Turing-complete by transformation.
80. Re:why would I write to that? by exomondo · 2014-12-07 12:01 · Score: 1
  
  What's the license?
  Uh it's right there, in the link under the aptly named "License.txt".
  Copyright (c) Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc. All rights reserved. Microsoft Open Technologies would like to thank its contributors, a list of whom are at http://aspnetwebstack.codeplex....
  Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
  http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
  Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the specific language governing permissions and limitations under the License.
81. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-07 12:04 · Score: 0
  
  To what does that license refer?
  The code in the repo, obviously.
  
  Sorry, but when I checked the article I didn't see anything about the release of .NET core under any particular license.
  Well the link to the repo is easily found and he's just posted the license text from it too.
  
  Yes, I could have checked that, but I didn't, and don't intend to unless it becomes important. It's basically irrelevant unless I adopt the approach, and if I do I'll probably get the code from a standard system repository.
  If you aren't going to spend the 2 seconds to look at license.txt in the repo because it is irrelevant why are you even asking then?
82. Re:why would I write to that? by HiThere · 2014-12-07 15:15 · Score: 1
  
  The link to the repo was NOT reported as being the link to .NET Core, but to a set of libraries that could be used with it. This makes it irrelevant unless I decide to use Mono.
  
  --
  
  I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
83. Re:why would I write to that? by tingentleman · 2014-12-07 23:49 · Score: 1
  
  Made originally by Joel Spolsky (he who worked for MS and originally developed the language itself)? Any less obviously biased uses of .Net online?
84. Re:why would I write to that? by SuiteSisterMary · 2014-12-08 03:56 · Score: 1
  
  How does the fact that the author used a language he knew invalidate the language being successfully used on a large and busy site?
  Do you advocate that all projects be written in a language completely new to the authors, to avoid 'bias?'
  
  --
  Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
85. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-08 04:01 · Score: 0
  
  The world is depressingly well-populated with developers who gravely underestimate the complexities involved in writing proper time-zone aware code of any non-trivial nature. The poster you're responding to above appears to be one of those people. They will learn, sooner or later.
  I have written such code often enough that I have grown *extremely* thankful to people like you, who *do* understand the complexities and have *also* made a (considerable) effort to do something about it.
  Not only that, but you also provide the result for others to build on.
  Or in other words: Thank you very much for your efforts, Westley. (Including by proxy others like you, working in other environments.)
86. Re:why would I write to that? by godefroi · 2014-12-08 05:08 · Score: 1
  
  NETMF runs on microcontrollers, has for years. Has been Apache licensed for years.
  
  --
  Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
87. Re:why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-08 10:28 · Score: 0
  
  FUD.
88. Re:why would I write to that? by beakerMeep · 2014-12-08 12:08 · Score: 1
  
  Like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F... ?
  I hope you realize it is not FUD to bring up a company's own former strategy (EEE) and own past bad behavior.
  
  --
  meep
89. Re:why would I write to that? by shutdown+-p+now · 2014-12-08 16:23 · Score: 1
  
  Microsoft has not open sourced .NET. They have open sourced a subset which is not quite enough to do anything meaningful. To write an actual application, you have to use libraries that are not part of .NET Core.
  The open sourcing process is not complete yet, but the stated goal is to open source the complete server stack - i.e. everything that is needed to run an ASP.NET vNext application. It's kinda messy in that it's spread across several GitHub repos right now, but look at this and this.
90. Re:why would I write to that? by TemporalBeing · 2014-12-10 09:38 · Score: 1
  
  What's in it for you is C# is a very good language.
  I wouldn't agree. There's a lot of things in the C# and C++/CLI (aka Managed C++) world that are just ass-backwards. If I wanted the advantage of what the .NET CLR gives me - supposed platform independences - then I'd write Java. As it is, I don't write Java b/c Java is a major PITA with no advantages over C++ or Python.
  
  Only advantage of .NET CLR/C#/etc is that it is heavily optimized for the Windows environments so its gets a boost that other frameworks (e.g Java) cannot take advantage of. But that, again, goes against the whole platform independence.
  
  Regarding Mono, it's not worth the bytes that make up the source. Apart from the potential legal issues (patents MS holds wrt to Mono were only licensed to Novell/SuSE users for a 5 year period, which has since expired), the APIs are highly tied to Windows. Yes, Mono has made some Gtk equivalents, but then why use it? Why not just use Gtk/C/C++ to start with?
  
  And .net is a fairly well designed framework/libraries for getting stuff done.
  Qt is by far better designed. WxWidgets and Gtk are probably better designed too.
  
  I've said this before Microsoft has never ever acted in a predatory manner towards people using their tools. What I mean by that is they want some nominal amount of money, but they don't want to drink your milkshake. Example game companies have used VC++ and other tools to develop games that have sold hundreds of thousands of copies running on windows and does Microsoft ever demand a cut? No.
  MS doesn't take a cut because you're giving it to them by using their Platform - Windows. VC++ is a write off in that manner. They invest highly in it to get Developers to write for their platform and products and write it off as part of the marketing/promotion/etc of the various products and company as a whole. If they didn't have Visual Studios then there would be a lot fewer developers developing specifically for Windows, and thus a lot less incentive for people to use Windows.
  
  It's all nice to bitch about Microsoft but a lot of their competitors are far worse, Apple, Google, Oracle. Ever try and develop a console game? Had your app not approved by Apple, of pulled by Google. Found yourself paying license fees through the nose for Enterprise software with no good options to escape, ALA Oracle. Or try and deal with network products ala Cisco?
  Yeah.
  Microsoft does the same thing. For instance, one company I know of bought a product. They thought they had all the licensing taken care of, only to later discover that they needed another $500m in Terminal Services licenses. Sure, MS might not have taken a cut from the product developers, but they sure did get a big cut of the sales (possibly more than what the product developers originally got).
  
  Or for instance if you develop using SQL Server Express (or whatever it is called now) and they outgrow what that will do; the choice? You build support for another database (e.g MySQL, MariaDB, PostgresSQL, Oracle, DB2, etc) or you help them upgrade SQLServer Express to SQL Server - which of course carries a lot of licensing and hardware requirements with it. Again, a big cut for Microsoft and one that the customer might not have anticipated.
  
  --
  Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
Minor revision? by jfdavis668 · 2014-12-05 08:05 · Score: 1

Their redesigning the .NET infrastructure, but bumping up the version number as a minor revision? 4.5 to 4.6?
1. Re:Minor revision? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:12 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, that seems odd. Java is at least doing it in a major version.
2. Re:Minor revision? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:14 · Score: 0
  
  Why do you assume that is a minor revision? 3.0 to 3.5 was not a minor revision. Nor was 4.0 to 4.5.
3. Re:Minor revision? by I+will+be+back · 2014-12-05 08:29 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Java is still in a first major version. Latest release is 1.8.0_xxx
4. Re:Minor revision? by jfdavis668 · 2014-12-05 08:33 · Score: 1
  
  You normally change the first number for a major revision, and numbers following the point as minor revisions. I realize that is not always followed. My Windows 10 test machine lists the version as 6.4.
5. Re:Minor revision? by Richard_at_work · 2014-12-05 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  That's because it is a minor version bump - the main difference is in how projects consume it.
6. Re:Minor revision? by Njorthbiatr · 2014-12-05 08:38 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  They used up all of their version increments when they went from Windows 8.1 to 10.
7. Re:Minor revision? by gregmac · 2014-12-05 08:43 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  .NET Framework is really two parts: the "built in libraries" and the CLR (common language runtime). When you install a Framework version, it installs only the CLR version it depends on, and not earlier ones (at least this is true at time of writing).
  .NET Framework 1.0 runs on CLR 1.0, and .NET Framework 2.0 runs on CLR 2.0. Okay, this makes sense and is easy to follow.
  Where it gets confusing is .NET Framework 3.0 and 3.5 -- both still run on CLR 2.0.
  .NET Framework 4.0, 4.5, and 4.5.1 runs on CLR 4 (they actually just call it "4", not "4.0").
  Source: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-u...
  What's makes this stupidly confusing is the compatibility: If you have .NET 3.5 installed, you can run a 2.0 application. If you have .NET 4.5 installed, you can run a 4.0 application, but you can't run a 3.5 application.
  IMHO, if they had just used 2.1 and 2.2 instead of 3.0 and 3.5, this could be much less confusing: .NET 4 apps run on .NET 4, and .NET 2 apps would run on .NET 2. Maybe they're doing this from now on, but the fact that 3.x is really 2.0 has screwed this up. I also don't get why they skip to .5 but that's far less of an issue.
  That said, this is the company that thinks 95+1 = 98, Vista+1 = 7, and 8+1 = 10.
  
  --
  Speak before you think
8. Re:Minor revision? by PhrostyMcByte · 2014-12-05 08:44 · Score: 2
  
  .NET Core is the redesign.
  .NET Framework (the full big monolithic install like we've got now) remains backwards-compatible and so 4.6 is appropriate.
9. Re:Minor revision? by DrStrangluv · 2014-12-05 08:47 · Score: 1
  
  It's kinda late now, but MS finally figured out that the major version should update when the runtime changes.
  To date there have been 3 versions of the runtime:
  1/1.1
  2.0
  4.0
  The 3.0 and 3.5 series were really about changes to the C# language and then adding all the linq stuff. All this new stuff, including the current 4.5.x version (which should have been named more like 4.1.x ) is still using the 4.0 series, or third generation, of the runtime.
10. Re:Minor revision? by bondsbw · 2014-12-05 09:26 · Score: 1
  
  .NET Core will now use semantic versioning. I'm not sure if .NET Framework will do the same... I don't know of anything planned for 4.6 that violates the rules of semantic versioning.
  The overall synchronized release of .NET will now be labeled by year, e.g. ".NET 2015".
  
  --
  All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
11. Re:Minor revision? by pr0fessor · 2014-12-05 09:56 · Score: 1
  
  They mentioned the .Net Core is already used in ASP.NET 5 and .Net Native but yeah... it still sounds like a major version change. I wander if they are thinking extending .Net to Mac OS, Linux, IOS, and Android this way is going to allow them to eventually replace java.
12. Re:Minor revision? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 10:30 · Score: 0
  
  Because the 4-component version numbers that Microsoft uses are Major.Minor.Build.Revision, thus 4.5.x.x -> 4.6.x.x is a Minor version update.
13. Re:Minor revision? by R.Mo_Robert · 2014-12-05 10:33 · Score: 1
  
  Java is still in a first major version.
  Latest release is 1.8.0_xxx
  Sort of. They've kept the internal version numbering like 1.8.x, but the public name since 1.5 has been "Java 5" and counting.
  
  --
  R.Mo
14. Re:Minor revision? by complete+loony · 2014-12-05 13:11 · Score: 1
  
  With semantic versioning, that just means that they haven't broken backwards compatibility. Java 1.8 can still run code compiled for Java 1.0.
  
  --
  09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
15. Re:Minor revision? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 20:12 · Score: 0
  
  The difference is, .net based programs won't haplessly try and run with the wrong version of the CLR. You might say Microsoft learned their f*cking lesson in the 90's about that. And the CLR is updated on windows via the standard update process. Other languages you are on you're own Tooter
16. Re:Minor revision? by drinkypoo · 2014-12-06 02:40 · Score: 1
  
  What's makes this stupidly confusing is the compatibility: If you have .NET 3.5 installed, you can run a 2.0 application. If you have .NET 4.5 installed, you can run a 4.0 application, but you can't run a 3.5 application.
  That's not just confusing, it's unacceptable. .NET 3.5 will still run all former versions' applications, at least, the ones I've tried... since it keeps the old runtimes around.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
17. Re:Minor revision? by Bengie · 2014-12-06 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  You're only guaranteed to be compatible within a version number. .Net 3.x has syntactical sugar that did not work with 2.x, but it did compile down to 2.x compatible bytecode. It may have been confusing, but there was no point in making another framework that the only difference was it refused to work with different version numbers, but was otherwise 100% compatible. Your argument was to call it 2.2, but that wouldn't work either, because of certain guarantees that MS places on major version numbers.
18. Re:Minor revision? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 15:15 · Score: 0
  
  There's only two runtimes, and two GACs. One for .NET 1.0/2.0/3.5, and the other for .NET 4.0/higher.
  You can use any lower version .NET reference in any higher version project, but not vice versa.
19. Re:Minor revision? by shutdown+-p+now · 2014-12-06 16:40 · Score: 1
  
  That is not quite right, either. .NET 1.x was a separate runtime; installing 2.0 does not install 1.1, you have to install it separately.
  2.0 will not run 1.x applications, unless you override their target runtime in the manifest.
20. Re:Minor revision? by SuiteSisterMary · 2014-12-08 03:15 · Score: 1
  
  Boy, it's a good thing Linux avoids this kinda bullshit entirely!
  Now, which Python distribution did I need to install for this app versus that app again....?
  
  --
  Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
21. Re:Minor revision? by godefroi · 2014-12-08 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  ... which isn't confusing at all, right?
  
  --
  Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
22. Re:Minor revision? by godefroi · 2014-12-08 05:12 · Score: 1
  
  Most likely a really old one. New Pythons have been coming out for a long time, but nobody uses them.
  
  --
  Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
23. Re:Minor revision? by shutdown+-p+now · 2014-12-08 16:24 · Score: 1
  
  You apt-get install the app, and it'll install the requisite Python version automatically as a dependency. And all Linux distros that I've seen handle 2.x and 3.x installed side by side just fine, as well.
24. Re:Minor revision? by shutdown+-p+now · 2014-12-08 16:25 · Score: 1
  
  That has not been my experience, based on user-reported bugs for the Python IDE that I'm working on. 2.x is still more popular in production, but 3.x is growing steadily.
25. Re:Minor revision? by godefroi · 2014-12-09 03:23 · Score: 1
  
  6 years since release, and the nicest thing that can be said for it is that it's growing steadily.
  
  --
  Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
26. Re:Minor revision? by shutdown+-p+now · 2014-12-09 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  Sure. Given the usual inertia when going against something very entrenched, this is always how it is going for a new contender. But so long as it is actually meaningfully growing, time will inevitably come when it overtakes.
  The big part to it was the libraries. It took a long time for all the big players to embrace 3.x, but this is the case now - Django, scipy stack etc are all here now. So, when starting a new project, there's pretty much no reason to go 2.x anymore. This hasn't been true even two years ago.
27. Re:Minor revision? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-13 09:17 · Score: 0
  
  are soo stupid, the . is just tiny + sign,MS just did the math for you, so go sign up for Xararin cause they open source micro asp.net and be a good hanselpuppet, what is wrong with u guyz
28. Re:Minor revision? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-13 09:18 · Score: 0
  
  are soo stupid, the . is just tiny + sign,MS just did the math for you, so go sign up for Xararin cause they open source micro asp.net and be a good hanselpuppet, what is wrong with u guyza
why would I write to that? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 08:10 · Score: 1, Insightful

The .NET API is among the best, and it's hard to deny that.
First.... by cptdondo · 2014-12-05 08:36 · Score: 1

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
Took long enough. So long that "winning" no longer matters.
1. Re:First.... by hairyfeet · 2014-12-05 10:54 · Score: 2
  
  DaFuq? Its not about FOSS "winning" anything, its about getting a new CEO that doesn't think its 1995 and understands that no everything is better with a WinFlag.
  You look at Balmer's entire reign and it was all about making a copy of EVERYTHING that was even slightly popular and planting a WinFlag on it. Java popular? MS Java and when that got knocked down .NET. Flash Popular? Silverlight. Hey Apple got a hit with iPod? Buy the rights to the Beat and stick a WinFlag on it and call it Zune. iPad/Surface, Playstation/Xbox, it was all about sticking WinFlags even when it made no fucking sense.
  Nadella seems to be the polar opposite, he seems more concerned with...get ready, its a shocker...making products that people actually want to buy! he also seems to get that you don't make money off of languages by sticking WinFlags but by selling support and since FOSS is pretty much designed around the support model? It just makes sense to use it in this case.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
2. Re:First.... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 10:58 · Score: 1
  
  Unless it goes down like this: First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you lose.
3. Re: First.... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 12:16 · Score: 0
  
  He he. That was sort of the whole point. I remember the Linux wars, the fud, the lawsuits.
  Now that all that is forgotten and irrelevant open source wins. And it no longer matters because the world has changed.
4. Re:First.... by serviscope_minor · 2014-12-06 04:09 · Score: 1
  
  iPad/Surface
  Ihe rest are fine but that is more than a little unfair.
  Ms have been beating on tablets for years. In 2005 the HP-Compaq TC1100 was almost the flagship for Windows XP tablet edition (it was a fantastic machine, ran Linux amazingly well and I still wish I had one, but faster). In fact if you read the insane iPad patent carefully, you'll see that because it only includes the exterior case and anything away from the edge is "just for illustrative purposes" and not normative in the patent, the TC1100 fits the description of the design patent almost perfectly.
  I'm pretty much planning on getting a Surface Pro 3 now due to its similarity to the TC1100, right down to the Wacom pen.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
5. Re:First.... by shutdown+-p+now · 2014-12-06 16:42 · Score: 1
  
  What you describe is the implementation details. The end result is that Microsoft is jumping onto the F/OSS bandwagon, which was long overdue. So yes, it's definitely a win for F/OSS - finally the last major OS and development tools maker is fully acknowledging that the model is not only valid, but preferred, at least for some types of applications.
  That it is also a win for Microsoft is orthogonal to all that.
Death knoll for Java by Urkki · 2014-12-05 08:47 · Score: 2, Insightful

I have to work with Java after a long while, and it is just... Suffocating. Archaic. Kludgey. Oracle. Ask! toolbar. trWTF.
C#, please come and rescue us! F#, deliver us from evil! MS has a chance to do some real good on the backend/server side landscape here. Let's hope they'll somehow manage to not screw it up!
I don't wish for Java to disappear or fail, mind you, I just wish I don't need to work with it in future...
1. Re:Death knoll for Java by bondsbw · 2014-12-05 09:32 · Score: 2
  
  I am definitely in the .NET camp. But if you are interested in functional programming and you have to work in the JVM, you might want to consider switching to Scala. It's pretty good stuff.
  
  --
  All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
2. Re:Death knoll for Java by gameboyhippo · 2014-12-05 09:49 · Score: 2
  
  Migrate to Java 8. I think that both languages are excellent, but I must say that Java 8's "stream" API is much easier to understand and work with than LINQ.
3. Re:Death knoll for Java by Opyros · 2014-12-05 13:58 · Score: 2
  
  Death knoll for Java
  So, this is the hill which Java chose to die on? <ducks and runs>
4. Re:Death knoll for Java by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 15:07 · Score: 1
  
  Knell, friend, knell.
5. Re:Death knoll for Java by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 16:21 · Score: 0
  
  C# is just a copy of Java
6. Re:Death knoll for Java by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 01:37 · Score: 0
  
  It is all about preferences, but have a look at this set of comparisons and you will need a nice argument to mantain what you just said there. http://blog.informatech.cr/2013/03/24/java-streams-preview-vs-net-linq/
  I also miss the yield returns when workin in Java quite a bit
7. Re:Death knoll for Java by phantomfive · 2014-12-06 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  I have to work with Java after a long while, and it is just... Suffocating. Archaic. Kludgey.
  Have you actually worked with C# much? It's basically the same as Java.......
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
8. Re:Death knoll for Java by Bengie · 2014-12-06 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  In the same way FireFox is the same as Chrome
9. Re:Death knoll for Java by phantomfive · 2014-12-06 09:05 · Score: 1
  
  Or vi is the same as emacs.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
10. Re:Death knoll for Java by godefroi · 2014-12-08 05:25 · Score: 1
  
  LINQ, or the Enumerable extension methods? Results (can be) similar, language is very different.
  The enumerable extension methods plus lambdas is more similar to Java's stream API, but only an insane person would prefer Java's implementation. As for LINQ (the DSL for working with the same methods), it's FAR less common. I rarely see it in practice, and I don't generally prefer it.
  
  --
  Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
11. Re:Death knoll for Java by gameboyhippo · 2014-12-08 07:21 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks for the article. It's been awhile since I've had the opportunity to work with C#. To be fair, when I worked with LINQ last time it was brand new and I was less experienced of a developer. Looking at it today, it looks very similar to Java 8's streams except with the benefit of C# having extension methods and being a bit more mature.
12. Re:Death knoll for Java by gameboyhippo · 2014-12-08 07:24 · Score: 1
  
  I honestly wasn't aware of the Enumerable extension methods. I haven't used C# is quite awhile, so I haven't kept up with my C# knowledge. I was comparing the DSL style to streams. Looking at the article the AC posted above, it looks like the enumerable extension methods and streams would be a fairer comparison. In which case, they look very similar.
13. Re:Death knoll for Java by godefroi · 2014-12-09 03:22 · Score: 1
  
  LINQ the DSL was the big news when it was released, but in the real world, it has gotten very little traction. The Enumerable extension methods that are the plumbing behind it, however (after all, the DSL simply gets translated into calls to this stuff by the compiler), are quite common.
  
  --
  Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
Haters gonna hate by MobyDisk · 2014-12-05 08:59 · Score: 3, Interesting

Those who have decided MS is eternally evil will never accept .NET. But you gotta admit that Microsoft is doing this right. This isn't the Gates / Balmer company any more. It seems that Microsoft realized that the Wintel & MS Office monopolies are dead, and that the bazaar is defeating the cathedral.
Their new hope is Azure. All this open-sourcing of .NET is to entice people to use .NET and thus use Windows Azure. By eliminating the stigma of being closed and proprietary, they eliminate the #1 objection to using .NET. Note that this door is open both ways: not only is .NET opening, but Azure is supporting other stacks: node and LAMP for example. They don't care what tools you use anymore, they just want your hosting business.
1. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anrego · 2014-12-05 09:41 · Score: 2
  
  Yup.
  I personally don't think I'll ever trust Microsoft as a company. Microsoft may seem somewhat benign these days, but they did some pretty damn evil stuff back in their day. The spirit of Microsoft past, which left a trail of corpses behind it back in the 90s and early 00s and put things in place to bolster their business which still cause grief to this very day is still in there. To them anti competitive practices were practically a religion, and just about everything they did had an end goal of crushing someone or at least locking future competitors out.
  It's pretty much impossible for me to read a Microsoft announcement and not immediately assume malicious intent. I suspect I'm not the only one either.
2. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 09:53 · Score: 0
  
  C# has been for a long time an ECMA and ISO standard, also there are open souces implementations of the CLR, even one from Microsoft since the begin.
3. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 09:55 · Score: 0
  
  The programming language is irrelevant. Sure it might attract programmers, but you also need a solid platform. Windows changes too much and too often for any real long term use.
  Regardless of what they write, they'll control how it gets developed and the direction. And make no mistake the focus will be Windows.
  PS has anyone read the license or understands how it works? CLA does not spell like GPL or MIT.
4. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 10:03 · Score: 0
  
  Are you fucking stupid or do you honestly believe that? If it changes too often, why can I still run software from the 90's just fine or with just a compatibility change menu. Try running binaries from the 90's in any modern Linux. Good fucking luck you tool.
5. Re:Haters gonna hate by phantomfive · 2014-12-05 10:15 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Windows changes too much and too often for any real long term use.
  Stability is the reason Windows is the #1 platform right now.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
6. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 10:31 · Score: 0
  
  Why would you want to run old binaries? Just recompile, and as a bonus you'll have all the current optimizations etc.
7. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 10:48 · Score: 0
  
  Binaries from the 90's, eh. Some people got stuck because their hardware and applications were okay on XP but borked on Win7. Same bork-up going to 64 bits. Try patching the source of Windows binaries. Or even looking at it. Change is inevitable - too bad if your needs don't coincide with MS business profits. Some of us can re-compile and run pretty much anything, including the OS and drivers, from pretty much any time frame that we want to. Can you say the same for Windows?
8. Re:Haters gonna hate by ilsaloving · 2014-12-05 10:54 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I don't think stability is the word you mean. Backward compatibility. Microsoft really did bend over backwards to make sure old stuff would still run on newer versions of OS, even when it was to Microsoft's detriment.
  Stability, however, is exactly the word I *wouldn't* use for Windows. ;)
9. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 11:30 · Score: 0
  
  Being an ISO standard is now a badge of dishonor after Microsoft spread corruption for all the world to see with the OOXML fiasco. So they have definitely come by all the hate the old fashioned way, they have earned it.
10. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 13:07 · Score: 0
  
  I get months of uptime on my windows 7 desktop. M current uptime is 5.4 months, and that shutdown was to take the computer outside and dust it in the spring.
  We've come a long way from the stability issues of windows 9x.
11. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 14:51 · Score: 0
  
  Always love to see a Slashdotter with such a dysfunctional sense of humour that every joke passes over their heads faster than a SR71.
12. Re:Haters gonna hate by gronofer · 2014-12-05 15:18 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Never say never. But how about they stop extorting royalties from software patents first? That's pure evil by many programmers' standards. I'd also like to be clear that they are no longer in the business of inventing "standards" that are intended to make their own products incompatible with anything else. I see that their office software still doesn't use the Open Document format by default.
13. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 15:44 · Score: 0
  
  I get months of uptime on my windows 7 desktop. M current uptime is 5.4 months, and that shutdown was to take the computer outside and dust it in the spring.
  We've come a long way from the stability issues of windows 9x.
  [0:root@docbox ~]$ uptime
  21:42:42 up 1190 days, 11:19, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.04, 0.01
14. Re:Haters gonna hate by msobkow · 2014-12-05 22:08 · Score: 1
  
  Good to know you bother installing those monthly security patches. What was your IP again? :P
  
  --
  I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
15. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 02:10 · Score: 0
  
  Backward compatibility, oh, you mean like when they transitioned everyone to Metro, and attempted to force all developers to rewrite their apps for the new "tiles" interface?
16. Re:Haters gonna hate by serviscope_minor · 2014-12-06 04:18 · Score: 1
  
  Microsoft may seem somewhat benign these days,
  u wot m8?
  Benign?
  They forced their dreadful, but patent encumbered exFAT filesystem right into the SD card spec. Never mind that it means that one has to pay royalties for a bad filesystem where the standard, royalty free and already implemented everywhere UDF wold have been a better choice.
  In fact a compliant SD card controller won't even nexessarily allow raw block access to the device unless it's exFAT formatted. So you can't even put a better filesystem on and expect to even work everywhere.
  Benign my ass.
  They're still utter fuckers.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
17. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 08:31 · Score: 0
  
  Yes but look at the quality of the crap you people pump out on Linux. A lot of it is FUCKING AWFUL. Call for it to be improved? Tough shit. Fork and improve it yourself. Who the hell has time to do that? If I'm not getting paid to do it I'm not getting paid.
  I swear you Linux FOSS fanboys live on your fucking trust funds and spend most of your time drinking fucking lattes in Costa.
18. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 08:37 · Score: 0
  
  Like a lot of "free" software, because it's no longer supported or because the original was a complete sack of bilge. I couldn't give a flying fuck if the source code is still available somewhere. I don't have time to dig into it and build the fucking thing myself. I have to get things done and I have to get them done now, not in a month's time when I've managed to get whatever pile of crap it is you're talking about to finally compile.
19. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 09:16 · Score: 0
  
  >Why would you want to run old binaries? Just recompile, and as a bonus you'll have all the current optimizations etc.
  Go try and cross compile an older version of uboot from sources and get back to us. And that's a simple project. Simply said, most older software for Linux and Mac's are dead and effectively unrecoverable. One the other hand I have the last non-copy protected version of ORCAD layout and it still runs 16 years later.
20. Re:Haters gonna hate by shutdown+-p+now · 2014-12-06 16:43 · Score: 1
  
  Speaking of "Windows Azure" - it's not that anymore, the "Windows" bit is gone. It's now just "Microsoft Azure".
  Which should also tell you something.
21. Re:Haters gonna hate by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 21:44 · Score: 0
  
  Their new hope is Azure. All this open-sourcing of .NET is to entice people to use .NET and thus use Windows Azure. By eliminating the stigma of being closed and proprietary, they eliminate the #1 objection to using .NET. Note that this door is open both ways: not only is .NET opening, but Azure is supporting other stacks: node and LAMP for example. They don't care what tools you use anymore, they just want your hosting business.
  Oh, wow, please no. I've seen demos for using node.js on Azure and it seems to actually be not bad, but C# on Azure is a painful process that no one would ever willingly endure. Each time you change anything in your app, it takes ~5-10 minutes to "redeploy" and Visual Studio will happily deploy an app without deploying the proper libraries along with it, giving no warning or meaningful error message. It's an awful, awful development platform.
22. Re:Haters gonna hate by ilsaloving · 2014-12-09 03:34 · Score: 1
  
  I realize you're just a trolling AC, but I'm biting. Try looking up what "backward compatibility" actually means, then post again.
Microsoft is dead. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 09:51 · Score: 0

Rest In Pieces
Re:Yes please! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 09:55 · Score: 0

Real men use openjdk.
Rumored killer app by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 10:10 · Score: 0

Mojang's been tasked to port Minecraft to .NET...
This is a good thing people by pouar · 2014-12-05 10:31 · Score: 1

I still don't trust Microsoft 100% due to their past, but I think they do want to do more in open source, so I'm cautiously optimistic about the new Microsoft. If IBM can change, so can Microsoft. And I'm hoping they actually did change, but I'm still a bit cautious with them.

--
while :;do if windows sucks;then mv windows /dev/null;pacman -Sy linux;fi;done
Re:/. GETS HACKED (READ LINK INSIDE) by sexconker · 2014-12-05 11:16 · Score: 4, Informative

Some identity providers (the "Log in with Twitter" bullshit) stupidly allowed people to authenticate with accounts that had unverified emails.
1: Create Twitter account with victim's email address.
2: Use "Log in with Twitter" bullshit on site.
3: Be granted access despite the email address associated with the Twitter account never being verified.
Some sites stupidly used the associated email address of the "Log in with Twitter" bullshit to match against existing users.
4: On such a site, you are granted access as the user with the email address you used in step 1.
There are three approaches to fixing this:
3: Twitter, Facebook, etc. should not provide identity services for accounts with unverified emails.
2: Sites should not trust (or even look at) the email address provided by an identity provider.
1: Site should simply NOT use this "Log in with Twitter" bullshit.
Re:Yes please! by ChunderDownunder · 2014-12-05 14:29 · Score: 1

Oracle's proprietary binaries are still the most common way of installing Java on operating systems without a package manager.
Red Hat were planning on contributing resources to the Windows port, iirc.
Tell me why all the custom desktop .NET Apps suck. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 14:40 · Score: 1

Come on here guys, either there are a ton of stupid devs that turn out sh!t software or .NET apps on the desktop are 100% garbage.
Case in point:
*) SCADA meter reading software that runs on desktop, saves server config in buried apps folder and changes with .NET updates.
*) Billing software so mucked up that it cannot run as a VMware Thin App, we have to install it in the VMware base image.
*) .NET config for settings are saved per user, so new user logs into workstation all the .NET apps that worked for last user are un-configured.
*) 32 bit memory mapping between Java and .NET leak in mysterious way so that issues are black magic and tier 2 support can't identify.
*) Terribly cryptic error messages when things go wrong and the messages do not even fit in the damn dialog box.
*) Dude you need to reboot your terminal server daily so our .NET app is more stable.
*) Install the damn app from the server and the first time you run it the damn developer has an update to download from the server.
*) All local users are still admins so they can up date the global software on your Win7 box right?
*) 32 bit memory issues, come on, fix your damn code and make it 64 clean, you have less than 500k lines of code, not 50 million.
NFG
Go back and re-write your custom software. Hell at least JAVA can run and we can script the settings so that IT does not get a call every time a user switches workstations or gets a new machine. What a pain in the @ss.
Obviously anon because I would hate to call out some of the big companies in this one industry as junior .NET developers.
Re:Yes please! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-05 18:22 · Score: 0

C# is nothing but a cheap POS copy of Java. Java 8 basically eliminates any advantage C# had. C# is, and always will be, a failure in the enterprise. The "open sourcing" of C# is just a desperate move by a desperate company to try and get some mindshare because no one really uses their shit.
Slashdot wins, dammit! by HongPong · 2014-12-05 19:27 · Score: 1

Maybe it isn't everything you could hope for, but it is a huge concession to the idea that the Slashdot crowd set out in favor of so long ago. Proprietary software steadily lost ground on the merits and now MS has to release code for many aspects of their whole ecosystem. You can all tip a wine glass and scrub your monocles, it is Progress.

--
--hongpong.com
Tell me why all the custom desktop .NET Apps suck. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-06 08:41 · Score: 0

Sounds to me from that list it's fuck all to do with C# and everything to do with the application being written by complete tools. Morons can write shite code in Java or C#. They're really not fussy.
Translation by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-07 05:09 · Score: 0

Those who have decided The Empire is eternally evil will never accept The Dark Side. But you gotta admit that The Empire is doing this right. This isn't the Emperor / Vader Death Star any more. It seems that The Empire realized that the Force Push & Trade Federation monopolies are dead, and that the Ewoks are defeating the ATATs.
Their New Hope is IV Death Stars. All this capture of the blueprints of The Death Star is to entice Rebels to waste time finding vulnerabilities in The Death Stars and thus wind up on The Dark Side. By losing the "secret" plans, they eliminate the suspicion of Chancellor Valorum. Note that this door is open both ways: not only will The Death Stars soon be fully operational someday, but working with The Empire is causing much fear and anger amongst the Rebels, for example. They don't care what color of lightsaber you use anymore, they just want your dependency upon The Empire.
FTFY
Re:Tell me why all the custom desktop .NET Apps su by Bengie · 2014-12-07 11:26 · Score: 1

I hear Windows is written in C, that means C is a bad language, right? Don't blame .Net for bad programmers writing in it.